I imagine if organised sports got their first big break in France or elsewhere rather than Britain it's more likely there would be one UK team.
That's gonna be a problem. The reason England got organized sports first is the industrial revolution which gave people disposable income and leisure for the first time.I imagine if organised sports got their first big break in France or elsewhere rather than Britain it's more likely there would be one UK team.
probably not. I imagine you'd have one massacre of an entire team and that'd be it.
I can't see how any of the NI teams could getting up into the higher leagues of the FA. Nor would I see much interest from GB to matches in the North, then of course there's Derry not even being in the IFA.
The US and Canada share soccer, basketball, hockey, and baseball leagues. It doesn't seem like it should be hard for Scotland and England to do likewise.
What's the difference between clubs and franchises?No the US has sports franchises to cover media markets. Soccer is a club game and the media market for the EPL is the entire planet. Or possibly beyond.
I cant see how Villa or Bournemouth could but funny game football
I cant see how Villa or Bournemouth could but funny game football
Off the top of my head, clubs are generally established at a local level on an ad hoc basis during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.What's the difference between clubs and franchises?
If they become part of the premier league, their visibility would skyrocket and therefore they'd get more money and attract better players.Aston Villa dwarfs any of the Irish clubs, in support numbers, money, facilities. There's no way any of the NI teams could fund a modern competitive campaign.
It seems to me most of the replies miss the point of the original poster. Rather than worrying about Scottish teams playing in England etc, what would a National UK Team look like? Would George Best have got into the England team of 1966? A late 1960s side featuring Jennings, Best, Moore, Bremner, Ron Davies, Ball, Charlton? In the early 1970s, imagine a team with Terry Hennessy, Ron Davies, Billy Bremner, Alan Ball and Martin Chivers? An 1980s UK side with Kenny Dalglish and Ian Rush up front, Graeme Souness and Kevin Sheedy (born in Wales) in midfield and Alan Hansen in defence, with Neville Southall in goal? To be frank, I can't think of any N. Ireland or Scottish players who'd get in a current UK side, while the star would be Wales' Gareth Bale. Aaron Ramsey and possibly Ben Davies would probably be the only other non-English players in the team.
So how can we have a single UK National Team and a single UK Premier League?
If they become part of the premier league, their visibility would skyrocket and therefore they'd get more money and attract better players.
It would mean a lot more money for the Scottish FA. That's how every corporate merger is supposed to go.The Premier League is just a rebranded "Division 1" and is fully integrated in to the English league system. Promotion/relegation is bloody difficult with multiple leagues below you as the below leagues have to start varying in size or the region they cover (hence Conference North and South having some teams which switch between to balance the numbers). I can't see how you can get a unified UK football system in post-1900; the regional identities are too strong, and the will to set up local versions so not dominated by England is too strong.
It's also power politics; why would the head of the Scottish FA give up being Chief Executive to be subsumed in to a British FA, which would be dominated by the English? They'd also lose their separate voice in maintaining the football rule book as part of IFAB.
This actually requires a pre-1900 PoD. And historically speaking the four Home Nations have been a unified part of the United Kingdom, all four are historically separate.
To be honest, I think the separate home nation teams are a result of the nature of the UK as a "country of countries", a situation which seems to be quite rare in the world as most other comparable examples have broken up or had local identities erased. I don't really see how it's possible to avoid this situation without making the UK more unified to try and erase national differences. The UK Government has normally avoided interfering in private affairs, which is how the national FAs started out.
.
I imagine if organised sports got their first big break in France or elsewhere rather than Britain it's more likely there would be one UK team.
I don't think it's really that rare of a situation. Many states were formed through unions of originally separate countries. From the standpoint of international law, the UK has been a single state since 1707. It's just an odd historical quirk that in a few sports like football, rugby and cricket, the four parts of the UK compete separately.
In a number of sports - tennis, basketball, cycling and athletics - there is only one UK team.
Unlikely; the West Midlands alone has around 2.5m people, compared to the whole of the RoI at 4.7m. You need to have decent local support to provide the base income for the squad; people buying tickets, corporate hospitality, replica kits, etc - and also to provide the atmosphere for the team to win in.
Their visibility would rocket, they'd get a bit of money, and then get relegated.
Personally, the only way I see all UK clubs playing together is in a European Super League (which would obviously not be English-dominated!).
On a side note, during the whole Wimbledon fiasco of the 1990/2000s, Sam Hamann investigated moving to Dublin as a Premier League side. It was rejected by the RoI Leagues, UEFA, and most other PL teams. Wimbledon were about the only team who would see it as an improvement, having a fan following smaller then some conference teams (and I say that as a former Wimbledon fan from the days of Vinnie Jones...).